Daniel Negreanu's very own containment thread. All things Danny go here
how bad must he be when a girl falls asleep while making out and snores right after?
life fish..... food arrived but didn
Stay tuned till tomorrow's YouTube masterpiece to find out.
My guess is Daniel donked off all his chips so he could enter
WSOP Event #70: $10,000 Pot-Limit Omaha Championship.
After all, PLO is Daniel's jam.
It is 3k ante. It might be 20k/40k bets, so maybe could lose a stack of 400k getting scooped in 2 or 3 hands. Usually one bet per street, but could get 4 bets in on a street. Stacks arent that deep so tournaments will be done in 3 days. I dont usually watch his vlogs, but wouls also like to see how he did that
Stay tuned till tomorrow's YouTube masterpiece to find out.
My guess is Daniel donked off all his chips so he could enter
WSOP Event #70: $10,000 Pot-Limit Omaha Championship.
After all, PLO is Daniel's jam.
It is almost certain he enters the 10K PLO. He may not be donking off his chips. He may not be as worried about busting as most in that tournament, including amateurs who want to keep their run going. I am sure he was looking for a final table or better finish, and not much concerned about pay jumps in a $1.5K. That may mean more $EV play than that of others playing tight on the bubble and ITM.
makes me laugh how hes trained his simp moderators
cracks me up little simps (coordi mason)
He’s an awful person and a narcissist to boot. So who is simping here?
I think the standard internet response would be for me to say: he’s not going to sleep with you if you keep glazing him
He seems to have gotten better at super high rollers since his match with Polk and probably GTO coaching. He still has lost huge amounts in them since his 2nd place in the $1M entry in 2014. I won't speculate more on why he plays them.
I agree that there are several better mixed game tournament players with multiple bracelets in the last 10 year. He obviously is well being the best NLHE tournament players in the high rollers.
I agree it is annoying how GG markets him like he is some superstar. The vlogs with the home scenes with his sham marriage to the gold digger are annoying.
I don't agree with all the crap about him being a losing player, etc.
I understand the concept, but that doesnt mean he's beating the game.If you bowled an average score of 150 and made millions in sponsorship deals to bowl, it doesn't mean you're beating the game, it just means you're getting paid to play. Nothing wrong with that, and this is just my opinion. I would rather be in his shoes any day than be a misreg grinder. But to me, this isn't
Beating the game means different things. When you beat the game enough to get sponsored, now it's a different game you're playing. Personality aside, he's a good poker player.
Beating the game means different things. When you beat the game enough to get sponsored, now it's a different game you're playing. Personality aside, he's a good poker player.
The totals may be negative recently, because he has a losing record in $100K+ entry fee tournaments. Almost all the players in those are post poker boom who came up learning with solvers. Ivey is maybe the only other pre poker boom player who plays them, and he seems to beat them. There are a few in them who came up with the poker boom, like Haxton. There are a few older players, like Arieh and Hellmuth, who play $50K entry fees in PLO and mixed, but not NLHE.
I don't know why he plays them, whether it has to do with his sponsorship agreement, because he thinks he is ahead in them because of the one drop cash in 2014 for $8 million, or he has money to blow.
It's like if you can beat $10/20 NL, but if you play $50/50/100 PLO or $1500/3000 mixed you get crushed, does that make you a losing player? The argument doesn't make any sense. There are many strong successful poker pros who couldn't beat $250K buyin tournaments.
The totals may be negative recently, because he has a losing record in $100K+ entry fee tournaments. Almost all the players in those are post poker boom who came up learning with solvers. Ivey is maybe the only other pre poker boom player who plays them, and he seems to beat them. There are a few in them who came up with the poker boom, like Haxton. There are a few older player
It's not the IF that makes you a losing player. It's the losing. Your argument is what makes absolutely no sense.
I've done well in live cash plo over the last ten or so years.
If I exclusively played the mis reg filled torture that is the Aria day game 5/10/20 plo im pretty sure id lose long term. But I'm not a losing player since I don't do that. See the distinction?
If someone knows how to count cards but they tilt at blackjack and play other pit games as a dog they're losing casino players . The fact they can be +ev some of the time doesn't change that.
I don't know/care if DNegs is a winner/loser. I will comment on my experience though. Yesterday I played the $1500 8 game mix and played with him for 3 hours when he was moved to my table roughly mid day. First, what a terrible table draw I had. To my immediate left was Justin Liberto, DNegs was 2 to my right, and halfway through the woman to my immediate right(who only knew how to play 2 of the games, lol wtf) busted and was replaced by philip sternheimer. I was like wtf, this is a $1500 event correct? 2 tables over had glaser and hellmuth.
DNegs played very aggressively, no surprise there. I am by no means a mixed game expert, though I do play a lot of mix game events. I will say that he did seem to play the mix games well and definitely seemed to almost always know where he was at in a hand. He also played hands very differently vs amateurs like myself vs how he played against the 2 pros at my table. He did a lot more bullying, or attempts to bully amateurs and was more cautious against the pros and a slightly different style.
He also wasn't just jamming eveyr other hand in the big bet games like you see him immediately do in the strictly NLH/PLO events. He played them more in a "normal" style and wasn't just jamming to gamble.
Also F** him and sternheimer, who busted me with an hour left in the day in limit hold'em, WHen they chopped up my money in a pot i 4 bet pre with AQ which was no match for their 85s and K8 off.
One other note, some of the cringey stuff is a bit of an act, except for the 2 or 3 moments he was filming something for the vlog, he played and acted like a normal person and wasn't annoying/cringey. He also had 1 or 2 funny comments, that we shall we say, were a bit off color, which he followed up with, well we know that's not going in the vlog.
Sternheimmer acted like a bit of a snob.
Liberto was fun to play with and seemed very down to earth and we had some good back and forth talk as well as battled a few hands, seemed like a genuine nice guy.
Turns out, basically everyone is a loser at high rollers
Wonder what the motivation for that analysis is. It certainly isnt good for poker, and anyone who knows anything about variance already realized this was the case.
Now we know why Ike tanked for ten minutes on that pay jump in main
Wonder what the motivation for that analysis is. It certainly isnt good for poker, and anyone who knows anything about variance already realized this was the case.
Just shows that for most of whoever you think the best players are, it's what a 5-10% ROI or so with high variance with the highest events. So mostly either everybody's got an ego or can sell action at higher markup then their EV.
WSOP events would be more interesting to me as there are weaker fields and some pros may be a surprise how far in the negative too but we only know the cashes.
Turns out, basically everyone is a loser at high rollers
The only winning move is not to play.
Wonder what the motivation for that analysis is. It certainly isnt good for poker, and anyone who knows anything about variance already realized this was the case.
Sometimes reality isn't "good"
Along the lines of what Rubix indicated, I have watched videos of final tables, etc. he was in. I played at his table online way back. I see his results and where he goes deep in WSOP tournaments. I also watched his instructional videos way back.
Polk was getting no action HU and then the GTO players with software were somewhat better. Very few people could beat him HU. I guess Negreanu did it for the publicity and to improve his game. Negreanu more or less accepted Polk's terms. If they played some mixed games or with a tournament format with increasing blinds, Negreanu would have done much better. Still you have to be a strong player to only lose what DN did playing HU.
He is a strong player. In no way a losing player or a fish. I am sure he would play more and different games if he wasn't getting subsidized by GG. People are just throwing trash at him that doesn't make sense.
Along the lines of what Rubix indicated, I have watched videos of final tables, etc. he was in. I played at his table online way back. I see his results and where he goes deep in WSOP tournaments. I also watched his instructional videos way back. Polk was getting no action HU and then the GTO players with software were somewhat better. Very few people could beat him HU. I guess
you're moving goal posts.
he is subsidized and he is a losing player.
"in no way a fish" lol he's a fish and plo and the high rollers for sure.
If he actually had to make a living off of poker he wouldn't do **** like play high rollers or get wrecked by Polk. But that's a different argument altogether than what he actually is as things stand.
he's not the only rich guy out there who loses but could win if he had to in order to support himself.
you're moving goal posts.he is subsidized and he is a losing player."in no way a fish" lol he's a fish and plo and the high rollers for sure.If he actually had to make a living off of poker he wouldn't do **** like play high rollers or get wrecked by Polk. But that's a different argument altogether than what he actually is as things stand.he's not the only rich guy out there wh
I agree that he is doing ridiculous crap like playing super high rollers and playing Polk HU because he is subsidized by GG. Also, maybe those things create publicity and help with his endorsement contract even though they lose money at poker.
you're moving goal posts.
he is subsidized and he is a losing player.
"in no way a fish" lol he's a fish and plo and the high rollers for sure.
If he actually had to make a living off of poker he wouldn't do **** like play high rollers or get wrecked by Polk.
Exactly. If Dnegs actually had to rely on poker for income with no sponsorships:
1. He couldn't afford his current lifestyle
2. He'd be playing much lower stakes as far as cash or tournaments go. He wouldn't be purposely pitting himself against all the GTO Wizards.
I think he IS a winning player, if he sticks to stakes and buyins he actually has an edge in. But in the nosebleeds he's outclassed
Again, I agree with both of you on this. Don't know why he is playing super high rollers or played Polk HU.
To take this statement a step further, turns out almost everyone is a loser at just about any rollers, high or low.
Plenty of people, who understand variance, do not comprehend, playing mtt poker is a losing proposition.
People (especially young people) need more reality.
Also: reality will eventually catch up to all poker players.
It is not said often enough, the only winner at poker, is the house (and the governments).
